There are uncanny parallels between former United States president Donald Trump's indictments and criminal charges levelled against key Malaysian politicians.
Trump was indicted on two separate charges: first, for falsifying business records and second, for mishandling classified documents.
Trump faces a third possible charge: inciting the Jan 6, 2021, riots in a brazen bid to overturn his presidential election defeat.
In Malaysia, a former prime minister has been convicted of corruption and is currently charged with money laundering and another count of corruption, and a deputy prime minister's trial is ongoing.
Naturally, everyone denied wrongdoing, but that's not the point. The point is: Trump denigrated the charges as a "witch-hunt" while viciously attacking prosecutors.
Our convicted and indicted politicians' hoary insistence of being targeted because of "selective persecution" and political vendetta. These claims are as absurd as they are disingenuous.
The backlash from alleged witch-hunts and selective persecutions are worn-out clichés, but we understand them as a necessary riposte to deflect implications of malfeasance, at least to their overzealous base.
It used to be that when someone of high standing is dragged to court on whatever criminal charges, that person would maintain innocence but are glad to get their day in court to prove their righteousness.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, in addressing this concern, acknowledged that there will be positive and negative perceptions, but averred that charges are based on facts and the rule of law, not political sentiments to confuse.
Here's the rub: why is it that only politicians seem to have trademarked accusations of persecution? You don't hear non-politicians grousing the same sentiment when they go on trial.
As long as law enforcement agencies like the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Attorney-General's Chambers operate independently and conscientiously, we should be glad that they are upholding their sworn responsibilities. Still, indicted politicians have the opportunity to prove the government wrong with access to hotshot defence lawyers besides exploiting the hearings as a "platform" to extract sympathy and political donations.
In any case, just because you scream persecution does not mean the indictments must automatically stop. Such screaming adds to the perception of duplicitous tactics to "intimidate" the prosecution and investigating officers.
A subtle implication of such screaming is that if ever these indicted politicians somehow return to power after a general election or a back-door coup, they would exact revenge against the people who dutifully carried out the charges.
This is the credo high-level law enforcement officers' advocate, even if their reputations have been deliberately and systematically sullied as a strategy to get charges dropped or acquittals. The grave injustice would have been if the government, cowed by the threats, stops indicting politicians.
In our criminal legal system, everyone — inconsequential or powerful — is subjected to this due process. This is the mainstay of a civil society, the bedrock of a living and breathing democracy.